Work Plan for Model Development at NCTCOG Arash Mirzaei, P.E. AMPO Travel Modeling Work Group St. Louis, MO June 11, 2007

Work Plan for Model Development at NCTCOG

Arash Mirzaei, P.E.

AMPO Travel Modeling Work GroupSt. Louis, MOJune 11, 2007

2Model Development Group

Outline Our Current Work

• Users• Requests• March 2007 status of modeling system

Our Future Plans• Models• Databases• Tools• Surveys• Schedule and Resources (CompletePlan)


Model Development Group (MDG)

Current Work


Modeling Services Users Internal Customers

Air Quality Planning and Operations Group Transportation Planning Group Congestion Management, Safety and Security Group Demographics and Goods Management Group Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) Regional Transportation Council and Committees

External Customers Local Governments (Cities, Counties) Transportation & Land Use Consultants Transit Agencies (DART, T, DCTA) TxDOT NTTA


Modeling Services Requests

1. Land use/Demographic Forecast integrated with economic and transportation

2. Sustainable Development/TOD

3. Parking Study

4. Truck Modeling and Goods Movement Analyses in Planning

5. HOV Analysis

6. Toll Revenue Analysis

7. Congestion Pricing

8. EJ Analysis

9. Emission Analysis

10. MSAT and Noise Analysis

11. TCM Credits for Conformity Analysis

12. Transit Planning, Ridership Forecast

13. Transit Revenue

14. New Starts

15. Thoroughfare Planning

16. Emergency Planning using Transportation System

17. Evacuation Planning

18. Ability to Expand Detail Modeling

Not currently addressed in the model (6)Partially addressed in the model (12)


The Travel Model Covers 5000 sq. mile with 4874 zones Contains 5 full urban counties of 9 non-attainment counties Level of roadway coding is up to local streets All transit networks are in the model All types of facilities are coded in maximum analytical detail that a 4-step model

supports The goal of the model performance is that no sub-area analysis with the same modeling

paradigm can improve the overall results. ONE model for the MPA. Capable of HOV, Toll, managed lane, and transit analyses Has three time periods Has air port and truck components Smoothly linked to AQ applications Supported by version maintenance Supported by file management and archiving system

The Travel Model (TM) is multi level, multi class, and multi purpose


March 2007 Status Tools

TM is very stable in TransCAD 4.8. Transit Coding Tools are complete and stable. Roadway QA Tools are complete and stable. Traditional Report Writers (Perf, Transit, LOS, ...) are complete. File Management system is complete and reliable.

Documentation TM Description Document is complete. Validation 1999 Reports are complete.

Training Training for use of TM is complete. Documents and Training presentations are available on Intranet. MUG meetings are regularly scheduled and have high interest.


Hours Spent on Projects - Oct ‘06 to March ‘07

Project Type % Hours Spent

Long-Term Projects of MDG 38%

Short Term Projects of MDG 33%

Short Term Projects for Other Groups

12%

Administrative 17%


Long-Term Projects of MDG (38%)

Training & Model Users Group Workshops (MUG) Model Support File Management TransCAD Lab Hardware Professional Development Design of Internet and Intranet sites Team Management


Short Term Projects: MDG (35%) Model Improvements

Model Diagnostic 2004 Summit Inclusion Comparative Reports Automated Executive Reports Modeling Area Expansion Sensitivity Testing UE Traffic Assignment Stability TOD Transit Model Development

Traffic Simulation

Model Implementation Transition to TransCAD 5.0 Re-batching the model


Short Term Projects: Other Groups (12%) Transit

DART Model Support DCTA New Start (Transit) DART Onboard Survey Support

Congestion Management ICM Project POD Locations

Demographics: Skims for Demographic 2040

TIP: Toll Revenue by County


Support for Management Activities (17%)

Administrative Committees Leave (Holiday/Vacation/Sick)



Goal: Models


Models Needed

Land Use Model

Person Travel Model

Commercial Travel Model

Regional Travel Model to cover 12 counties


Land Use Model (LUM): Features Model Features

Accepts control totals and policies for developments Considers effect of Transportation Mode (e.g. Car Ownership) Sensitive to accessibility measures from travel model

Roadway (HOV, Toll, Managed) Transit (Bus, Rail, BRT, PNR) Bike/Pedestrian

Sensitive to Development Policies Zoning Tax Pricing

More TBD


Land Use Model: Input & Output Input

Control Totals for Population and Employment Transportation Network Land Availability Development Policies

Output (In Large Zone Level) Population Employment # Households # Families Median Income More TBD


Person Travel Model: Features Model Features

Population Synthesis – Generates Households & Family Detail, Worker, Car Ownership

Activity/Trip Generator Time and Duration of Activity MC & DC in individual level DTA (Signals, Querying, ITS, Toll) Transit Assignment Trip Data at Individual Level Effect of accidents Sensitive to Operational Devices Capable of demand management testing Compatible for traffic micro simulation for any sub-area


Person Travel Model: Input & Output

Input LUM output Small Zone Structure Transportation Networks (Roadway, Truck, Rail, Transit, Bike/Ped)

Output Travel Activities of Individual Persons: (Vehicle Ownership, TOD,

Mode, Purpose, Activity Duration, More TBD) Traffic Volume by class (income, vehicle class, TOD) LUM Inputs


Commercial Travel Model: Features

Model Features Tour-based Goods and Services Delivery Effect of hubs and depots at Transfer Stations Fleet Allocations TBD


Commercial Travel Model: Input & Output

Input LUM Output Small Zone Structure Transportation Networks SAM (perhaps)

Output Travel Tours for Trucks Truck Volume (Lightweight, Heavy Truck, TBD) EI, IE, EE Tables


Operation of the Models Full Feature Model Run will run in order of days and produces the

finest detail of the model output. Project level runs will be customized to run in shorter periods based

on the required analysis. For example, 20 class assignment is not needed for # of Lane Determination.

Computer hardware – A lab with distributed capabilities will be built for the model.

Storage solution is already designed and scaleable. Sub-Area analysis of model is doable in all steps of the model. The model & network are compatible for sub-area traffic measures.


Work Plan for New Model Creation Initial Preparation

MDG conducts user and stakeholder meeting to determine the needs. MDG provides historical perspective of model application for guidance. MDG converts the needs to model features and structure. MDG performs investigation and conducts peer reviews to design the model

framework.

Framework: MDG breaks the framework into model components with I/O that can be

outsourced for development. Outsourcing of model components happens sequentially with significant overlap to

limit the length of development. Different contracts for each component.


Work Plan for New Model Creation (con’t)

MDG is responsible for connecting the components and creating a functional model.

Timeline (5 years time span) Surveys – 3 years Model Development – 4 years Reporting Tools, Application Interface, Diagnostic Reports – 1 year



Goal: Databases


Databases Connected to the Model Roadway Network – Fully rectified roadway network with signal location

and ITS. Coding process needs to ensure quality assurance. Coding should be done in database as soon as construction project plans are

ready (master network). Coding environment should be 100% compatible and convenient to use with other

components of Information Systems.

Transit Network – Fully rectified transit network with bus operation and schedule. Inventory Data for each year needs to be kept in database. Coding System should be simplified in process. Fleet data needs to be kept as well.


Databases (con’t)

TIP – GIS-based Network

Counts and Surveys – A coordinated effort for data collection and database management is highly needed. For example, for every project that NCTCOG funds, data format

should be already identified in RFP.



Goal: Tools


Modeling Tools Needed

Roadway– Coding Tools need major overhaul. Idea of master network seems doable.

Transit– Major modification after master network implementation is necessary.

Reporting – Models (LUM, PTM, CTM) need extensive reporting capabilities.

Comparative – Necessary to capture different model runs’ output efficiently.

Diagnostic – Necessary to inform the analyst of odd model output and inputs.



Goal: Surveys


Surveys Needed

Household Survey Transit Onboard Surveys External Survey Airport Workplace Parking Time-of-Day Counts Time-of-Day Speeds Commercial Vehicles


Survey Descriptions Household Survey in 2008 or 2009

It may feature market-based sampling to avoid new surveys for airport, transit, or other markets that the general survey normally under samples.

Future model structures and needs are formally determined before the survey is done.

How the survey is done is determined based on available technology.

We may perform a low budget pilot test to test the new technology. Options are using TxDOT system, adding to NHTS Samples, and

conducting our own.


Survey Descriptions (pg 2) Transit Onboard Surveys

DART 2007 (funded through UPWP and currently in early stages). FWTA 2008 (funded through UPWP). DCTA.

External Survey TxDOT 12 County 2006 is done, but needs to be checked for adequacy for mobility.

Airports Depends on Household survey method.

Workplace The need should be investigated within the new model structure.

Parking Inventory Data Spots available and use by TOD.


Surveys Descriptions (pg 3) Time-of-day counts

Same year as Household survey. Locations should be identified as model framework is designed. Classification of Vehicles. After first major data collection, annual surveys need to be scheduled

for smaller samples.

Time-of-day Speeds Same as Counts.

Commercial Vehicles


The Future Plan: CompletePlan


Future Plan (CompletePlan) CompletePlan is the fastest possible plan.

Duration: 5.5 years (2007 to 2013)

Requirement Resources are allocated with no restrictions on budget.

What is Included Cost and time estimates for major items. A complete working model plan. Documentation

What is Not Included Training Hardware


CompletePlan: Cost Summary

Cost (for 5.5 yr) % Total Avg. Annual Cost

Total $12,442,000 100% $2,262,000

Staff* $5,642,000 45% $1,026,000

Outsource $6,800,000 55% $1,236,000

Do Nothing $2,939,000 24% $534,000

Plan Addition $9,503,000 76% $1,728,000

*Staff cost is based on $67.5/hour including 1.33 OH


CompletePlan: Cost Breakdown

(in Thousands) Outsource Staff Total

Survey $4,550 $809 $5,359

Model Development $2,250 $3,122 $5,372

Ongoing Activities - $1,707 $1,707

Total $6,800 $5,638 $12,438


Survey Cost Breakdown


Household $2,000 $315 $2,315

DART Onboard $350 $35 $385

FWTA & DCTA Onboard $400 $73 $473

Airports $300 $88 $388

Workplace $300 $88 $388

Parking $200 $70 $270

Count & Speed $500 $70 $570

Commercial Vehicle $500 $70 $570

Survey Total $4,550 $809 $5,359


Model Development Cost Breakdown


Short Term - $1,123 $1,123

Land Use $1,000 $597 $1,597

Framework - $105 $105

Population Synthesis $250 $105 $355

Activity Based Model $600 $211 $811

Commercial Veh. Model $400 $140 $540

Dynamic Traffic Assign. - $281 $281

Model Integration - $560 $560

Model Dev. Total $2,250 $3,122 $5,372


Ongoing Activities Cost Breakdown


Proj. for Other Groups - $290 $290

Support & Mgmt - $1,417 $1,417

Ongoing Act. Total - $1,707 $1,707


CompletePlan: Staff Manpower Summary

*Staff cost is based on $67.5/hour including 1.33 OH

Cost (5.5 yr)* % Total Avg. Annual Cost

Model Related $2,475,000 41% $ 451,000

Model Support $1,716,000 29% $ 312,000

Outsource QA $1,161,000 20% $ 211,000

Other $ 290,000 10% $ 53,000

TOTAL $5,642,000 100% $1,027,000

Manpower Avg. Annual Manpower

Person Hour 83,580 15,200

Person Year 40.1 7.3